Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2020 (4) TMI 821

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al grounds before us, the effective issues that are to be decided by this Tribunal are as under:- a) Whether the sale consideration of Rs. 37,92,600/- on sale of land should be considered as against the actual sale consideration received in the sale of Rs. 19,85,000/- for the purpose of computation of capital gains in the facts and circumstances of the case. b) Whether the assessee is entitled for claiming cost of development of Rs. 5 lakhs while computing the capital gains in the facts and circumstances of the case. c) Whether the assessee is entitled for claim of exemption under Section.54F of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....through a mason Shri C.Vasudevan. The assessee had merely produced the receipt for payment of Rs. 5 akhs from Shri C.Vasudevan to substantiate her claim. The Ld. A.O disbelieved the same and further observed that the PAN and address of Shri C.Vasudevan was not produced before him to check the correctness of claim made by the assessee. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer denied the benefit of grant of deduction of cost of improvement at Rs. 5 lakhs while computing the capital gains. This action was upheld by the learned CIT(A). 4. Before us, the Ld. A.R. argued that without incurring of development cost on the said land, the sale of land could not have happened. Hence, Ld. A.R. vehemently pleaded that assessee be given a deduction towards ....